It is ironic that when the media or medical / pharma community wade into vaccine safety discussions autism parents are frequently labelled “emotional.” This adjective is most often used to describe concerned mothers and mothers of autistic children. It is a sexist dismissal of, by and large, the real experts on autism, the people who live it every single day. Imagine the CDC labeling sufferers of prostate cancer “emotional!” Or imagine the media implying that testicular cancers survivors are not smart enough to understand (Thunderclap!) “the science!”

Women, as we all know, are prisoners of their high strung emotions, unable to rationally make decisions. The crazy thing is that the autism moms I see on TV are incredibly articulate and well versed on the specific problems with the CDC’s vaccine science. More to the point, I don’t hear these mothers making hysterical accusations or advocating for censorship.

Conversely when I hear CDC officials and pharma interest groups arguing against vaccine safety research I hear groundless irrational assertions and inflammatory declarations.

“You (by doubting vaccine safety) are endangering children’s lives!”

“Parents who space out vaccines are selfish and irrational!”

“Do you want children to die of preventable diseases?”

“You are placing African children’s lives are risk!”

So much for the measured and scientific approach to vaccine safety. But the hysterics don’t stop there. Oh, no! AAP spokespeople argue vehemently against more vaccine safety research because “millions of lives are saved by vaccines in Africa!” as if one thing has to do with the other. Additionally, I resent the implication that I should just shut up about my child’s vaccine induced brain damage because the work of the Gates Foundation is more important than my child’s life. Americans are not willing to sacrifice vaccine safety to make life easier for vaccine distributors in Africa.

Last month we saw how the mere idea that President Trump might form a vaccine safety commission brought on a state of frenzied anguish among pharma surrogates. A proposal for independent arbitors meet to evaluate the current state of vaccine safety research was described as a “dangerous” development that could grievously harm Americans. The concept of talking, not even doing, just talking is presented as “dangerous.” Isn’t the desire of pharma surrogates and govt. agencies to censor free speech the real danger?

“Forming a vaccine safety commission with or without Kennedy would be counterproductive at best, harmful at worst!” Dr. Mark Schiess

“Presidential commisions are serious affairs...creating a panel on autism with Kennedy would do enormous damage!” Fred Vox

“Establishing a commission could be itself harmful!” Alison Singer

Dr. William Schaffner said he “was sounding the alarm!” about a possible vaccine safety panel. Such a panel, “will put children’s lives at risk!”

So let’s step a step back and carefully consider these emotionally overwrought answers. A theme in criticism of RFK JR’s proposal is NOT the desire to make vaccines safe as possible but a sense of personal outrage regarding the First Amendment. Clearly one should not have the right to ask these questions. It is as if by merely speaking about ways to improve vaccine safety = children WILL die.

Kennedy’s critics are that juvenile in their arguments. There is truly a conflating of an open discussion about conflicts of interest in vaccine safety research with death and destruction. Additionally there is absurd sense of hurt feelings when families dare to doubt that CDC officials can manage vaccine safety well. The AAP exudes a sense of entitlement to tell parents what to do. A number of parents who questioned AAP directives have been accused of engaging in a “personal attack.” I mean, really...grow up.

Ahhh to have such a soft and tender heart, so easily bruised, a prisoner of one’s immature emotional development ...I remember having a heart like that- when I was a 13 year old girl. I am all too familiar with the irrational, immature and paranoid school of argument making. Oh boy, was I an expert in this kind of hysterical crazy talk.

When my Dad told my brother and I to clean out the garage, I said I “was tired of being treated like a slave!”

When I wasn’t allowed to go to a party because of my poor grades it was because my parents “wanted me to have NO friends!”

When my parents said we couldn’t get cable TV it was because they were “trying to bore me to death and destroy ALL fun!”

When my brother threatened to tell our parents I broke some rules I told him “to shut your mouth or I will shut it for you!” There it is- censorship - the most desperate of all arguments.

I was a typical American suburban girl to whom almost everything felt like life and death. I was irrational and over sensitive. If I can san anything in my own defense it would be that I was 13 and that my brain was not fully developed yet. Can the anti vaccine safety hysterics say that?

The reasoning center of my brain no longer operates in black and white, my heart is no longer so delicate, not so easily pierced. My ego is not so fragile. I am a typical autism parent of a vaccine injured child. We have to be grown ups, not victims, in order to care for our kids.

It is time for the CDC, community of autism academics and recipients of pharma $, which includes a number of autism advocacy groups to put on their big girl and boy pants and reflect on the First Amendment. Neither censorship or hysterics will make our families go away. Instead of all the theatrics see “Vaxxed” and read even a small portion of the research complied by Bobby Kennedy.

When I think of the daily box of wipes I went through from my child's age of 14 months (after the MMR) to age 5-1/2 --his toddler diarrhea, and the ritual of using Clorox wipes then to clean up the bathroom after each giant ball of poop or the diarrhea--I fear for the child in any country without hot running water who gets bowel disease from vaccination. I fear that this child will put drinking water of his entire community at risk and will be shunned or worse. I fear that the mother's despair will be profound--mine was, and I had a home, running water, wipes, and enough food. And I fear what will happen when the rest of the world realizes what we have done to their infants, their toddlers, their children, their families, their communities. That our children are supposed to suffer and that that is somehow going to help children elsewhere in the world is the most bogus argument at all. Vaccine safety here is imperative for us and for others around the world. This breaks my heart.

I love this, Katie! Misogynistic behavior is maddening when it is not recognized as such. I remember (most of you are too young for this) when a man derogatorily questioned why I was spending so much time pinning my cleaned wet clothes to the clothesline outside. He insisted that I could be more efficient if I just threw them over the line. I had learned from my mother and my own experiences the importance of spreading out and pinning, and I tried to explain that his insistence that he was wiser in this regard was chauvinistic, but he never understood my reasoning. Today, I sit in front of the news shows, especially on MSNBC, and can't think of anything other than how hypocritical they seem to me. They rant and rave about how misogynistic Trump is but never realize how misogynistic they themselves are when they right off the concerns of mothers of autistic children as if there is no reason to listen to them. When did men with their "science" become more knowledgeable about our own children than we, the mothers, are? They are belittling something that is at the core of who I am as a woman.

Katie is touching a cord on just how sexist it is to claim that mothers are too emotional or just do not understand science, while they would never dream of labeling prostate sufferers as emotional or unable o understand the science.How did this come to be? Decades ago if a child seizured, became autistic or died from vaccinations-all the other mothers would not go to that pediatrician or opt not to get the same shots. Mothers raising kids were everywhere, they had luncheons, helped babysit for each other, had communication on the telephone, arranged for informal playdates, took painting classes together, sewed, knitted in groups and more. Working was an option or a choice. Back then one parent could work and pay for the house, cars, health and vacations-the other parent could mostly raise the children. Today however-working is no longer a choice, rather it has become a "Must do." Today both parents working full time can barely pay for the house, healthcare, cars and necessities. The women who used to be able to help one another can barely come up for air. Today when 1 of the 76 vaccines containing aluminum, mercury, cancer causing formaldehyde, 50 year old aborted fetal cells able to cause tumors, and more are shot into newborns , babies, children and teens and the child has a severe chemical reaction-there are rarely groups of mothers there to listen or help as they are in the field working while their own children are being raised in conglomerate Day Care centers.The big box Day Care Centers often pay the devoted staff at least $10.00 per hour. Where does the mother turn to? She runs back to the pediatrician who tells her that Seizures are normal, that the baby must have had a virus before the vaccines, that it was a coincidence, that the baby died for no known reason because in SIDS-some babies just die...and finally when her baby is ill she is being told that she is, "too emotional."

Aye Katie your right! I remember a polite discussion I was having with a pro-pharma pharma owned consultant ..and when stuck in the corner they said your getting very emotional and angry about this..I replied no I am still in the same voice I started the conversation with - I am still talking to you in the same polite manner - NOW can we continue with the facts and the truth and continue the conversation - They then said I was emotional which I wasn't and they both walked away.Rats of the ship -plop.

Not sure if you have the Donald on speed dial but I am sure that if he spends 15 minutes on Simpsonwood, the MMR vaccine, Dr. Thorsen, the Vaccine Court & the CDC trashing “studies of black children they do not like” … the Autism epidemic will come to a halt.

I would suggest a few arrests at the CDC during a mid-day live Trump press conference.

You're so right Tony, we see it in the schools every day. The teachers (and psychologists) know.
Spectrum disorders are real and many of the causes are known.

"not understanding the science" is as ridiculous as "babies die spontaneously in their cradles because they're were placed on their backs instead of their sides". really ? that's what's pediatricians believe ?

Iceland
Created: 18 Feb 2017
We, the signers, are concerned about our children's health and development in schools with wireless technology for teaching. A vast amount of scientific studies have shown considerable medical risks with long-term exposure to Radiofrequency Radiation (RFR) from wireless devices and networks well below the recommended reference levels from the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP).

We ask the authorities to take their responsibility for our children's future health and wellbeing.

In May 2011 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) at WHO classified RFR as a Group 2B carcinogen, i.e., ‘possibly’ carcinogenic to humans. Since then more scientific studies on exposure to RFR in humans, animals and biological material have strengthened the association of an increased risk for cancer, especially brain tumors. Several laboratory studies have shown mechanistic effects in carcinogenesis such as oxidative stress, down regulation of mRNA and DNA damage with single strand breaks. The IARC cancer classification includes all sources of RFR. The exposure from mobile phone base stations, WiFi access points, smart phones, laptops and tablets can be long-term, sometimes around the clock, both at home and at school. For children this risk may be accentuated because of a cumulative effect during a long lifetime use. Developing and immature cells can also be more sensitive to exposure to RFR. No safe level of this radiation has been determined by any
health agency and therefore we have no safety assurances.

Besides the cancer risk, RFR may also affect the blood-brain barrier to open and let toxic molecules into the brain, hurt neurons in hippocampus (the brain centre for memory), down or up regulate essential proteins in the brain engaged in the brain's metabolism, stress response and neuro-protection and affect neurotransmitters. Sperms exposed to Wi-Fi have been seen
with more head defects and DNA damage. RFR can increase oxidative stress in cells and lead to increase of pro-inflammatory cytokines and lower capacity to repair DNA single and double strand breaks.

Cognitive impairments in learning and memory have also been shown. Results from the OECD's PISA performance surveys in reading and mathematics show decreasing results in countries that have invested most in introducing computers in school. Multitasking, too many hours in front of a screen, less time for social contacts and physical activities with risk for
aches in neck and back, overweight, sleep problems, and information technology (IT)addiction are some of the known risks and side effects of IT. They stand in marked contrast to the often claimed, but largely unproven possible benefits.

We ask the school authorities in all countries to acquire knowledge about the potential risks of RFR for growing and developing children. Supporting wired educational technologies is a safer solution than potentially hazardous exposures from wireless radiation. We ask you to follow the ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) principle and Council of Europe Resolution 1815 to take all reasonable measures to reduce exposure to RFR.

Practical rules for schools concerning children and wireless technology.

- No wireless networks in preschool, kindergarten and schools.

- A hard wired direct cable connection is recommended to each classroom for the teacher to use during lessons.

Vaccines are only part of the devastation and poisoning our children are enduring. You also have to look at the poisons in our environment(air, water & food). Consider the co-morbid effects when you combine various toxic exposures. I am a school psychologist and see it daily. The epidemic is here and growing!!!!

What we need is independent research to take a good look at the connection between vaccines and Autism . We need a study an independent study looking at the vaccinated verses the unvaccinated we need to be treating the parents as the experts . We need serious studies looking at all vaccines , we need respect and understanding of our roles in our children's lives .And if you were the parent of a disabled child no doubt your emotions would be rampant , the times a have heard I DO NOT KNOW HOW YOU COPE , so the emotion is there from others who do not have a child with Autism, so not just mothers of a child with Autism . It comes from strangers who have no idea of our day .

LOL! O.J. search for the real killers, on golf courses. Too funny Bob.
And Linda; gnashing of teeth, we parents have been doing that for many a long year; I look forward to the day that that emotion spreads to the CDC. Let them lay awake at night an implore God to help them. They might be surprised how much they believe in superior being when their backs are against the wall and they are about to lose it all.

Vaccine injury denial is steeped in mysoginy and racism. The worst and cruelest part of all is that the profiteers who claim their in it for children in third world countries get to exploit the fact that those citizens of the earth have even less of a chance of standing up to vaccine violence. Thank you so much Ms Wright for giving voice to the TRULY voiceless!

Behind the door of the Vaccine Commission lies all the evidence of their crimes in open display laid out for all to see. No censorship. Nothing to cover up the carnage. I think the kicking and screaming and gnashing of teeth has just begun.

“Forming a vaccine safety commission with or without Kennedy would be counterproductive at best, harmful at worst!” Dr. Mark Schiess
“Presidential commisions are serious affairs...creating a panel on autism with Kennedy would do enormous damage!” Fred Vox
“Establishing a commission could be itself harmful!” Alison Singer
Dr. William Schaffner said he “was sounding the alarm!” about a possible vaccine safety panel. Such a panel, “will put children’s lives at risk!”

all AGREE on a single premise ... the commission would be "harmful and dangerous" .. which means .. THEY either KNOW or EXPECT .. any Commission on vaccine safety will find vaccines .. ARE NOT SAFE.

Indeed ... if THEY really had confidence THEIR vaccines are .. without doubt .. safe .. THEY would be urgently asking for the Commission's.

If it were not such a serious issue ... THEIR ADAMANT OPPOSITION TO "PROVING VACCINES SAFE" WOULD BE MATERIAL FOR SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE SEGMENT .. AS WAS O.J. SIMPSON'S PROMISE TO "SEARCH FOR THE REAL KILLERS" .. ON THE NUMEROUS GOLF COURSES IN FLORIDA.